Washington "needed a pretext
for pulling out of the treaty" and they found it, Nikolai Patrushev said
© AP Photo/Sakchai Lalit
MOSCOW, August 6. /TASS/.
Washington has not presented a single shred of evidence to Moscow that might
prove Russia is in breach of the Intermediate Nuclear Force Treaty and at the
same time refused to discuss its own violations, Russian Security Council
Secretary Nikolai Patrushev told the Russian mass media in an interview.
"I am unable to mention a
single instance [of a violation] or piece of evidence they [the US] presented
to us. There has been nothing of the sort," Patrushev said when asked if
the United States had presented any proof of Moscow’s violations of the treaty.
"We held meetings with our US
counterparts. I met with [White House National Security Adviser John] Bolton.
Russia’s president [Vladimir Putin] received him, too. We discussed that but
received no evidence," Patrushev pointed out. In his opinion, Washington
"needed a pretext for pulling out of the treaty, and they found such a
pretext for themselves and their partners." "But we do not know
anything. We do not know what we have breached. We know what the Americans have
violated and we pointed to these three issues: missile launchers, target
missiles and drones. But they refused to discuss their violations,"
Patrushev said.
He said that in accusing Russia of
INF violations, the United States hinted at the missile 9M729. "I believe
that they spoke about it with their partners," Patrushev said. He stressed
that Moscow had invited Washington to take a look at the missile "behind
closed doors" to get "thorough information about it" and see for
themselves that this weapon does not violate the INF Treaty. "They
refused," Patrushev noted. He recalled that after that Russia arranged for
an open multilateral demonstration of this missile in Patriot Park, where many
foreign delegations arrived, the United States did not participate in this
event and advised its NATO partners against going there, too."
Withdrawing from treaties
By withdrawing from arms reduction
treaties, the United States seeks to ensure its global dominance, according to
Patrushev.
He pointed out that the US had
first pulled out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and then out of the
Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. "Only the Strategic Arms
Reduction Treaty (New START) still remains in effect but they [the Americans -
TASS] have already said they were considering leaving it in 2021," he
noted, adding that there also was the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons and "these are the aspects that still contain them [the
Americans - TASS]."
Patrushev noted that Washington was
pulling out of treaties "in order to ensure its global dominance."
"As long as these treaties are effective, they [the Americans] won’t
dominate any part of the world. But when treaties collapse, they will deploy
any number of weapons to any region, against any country they will consider to
be their adversary, seeking to ensure their dominance," Patrushev said,
noting that achieving dominance was the goal mentioned in many US strategic
dominance.
"It will lead to chaos because
other countries will respond to these things and an arms race will go on,"
the Russian Security Council secretary pointed out.
Patrushev noted that August 6
marked an anniversary of the US nuclear bombing of Japan’s Hiroshima. "Why
did it happen? Because they had dominance, they knew that no country would be
able to strike back. They should not be allowed to dominate and believe that no
one can respond to their actions," Patrushev pointed out. He stressed that
Russia’s development of new weapons "makes it possible to hold dialogue
with the US and promote" Moscow’s interests.
Multilateral treaty
A multilateral intermediate-range
and shorter-range missile control treaty should take into account the French
and British arsenals, however, the United States is yet to express willingness
to allow that, Patrushev said
"Speaking about an
intermediate-range and shorter-range missile treaty, the Americans were saying
that it would be beneficial if it was multilateral, with China included in it
as one of the sides. But we are aware of the Chinese statement, they do not
wish to participate in this process and, therefore, it is delusory to hope that
we will ink such a multilateral treaty," he said. At the same time,
Patrushev added the following: "why should only China [be involved], since
it’s a multilateral treaty?" he said. "Why are the UK and France not
considered?" He underlined that Moscow had outlined this topic, however,
"the US is ready to include China, which China is not striving for, and is
not willing to consider" the UK and France.
Talks with US on strategic
stability
Russia hopes for positive steps at
negotiations with the United States on strategic stability and believes that
the defense agencies of both countries should take part in this process,
Patrushev said.
"I hope that we will achieving
success after all in the process of the talk on both strategic stability and
international security," the security chief said.
It is very important that Russian
and US Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump "raise the issue of
strategic stability during each encounter or talk," Patrushev said.
"This gives the hope that this theme will be discussed and some positive
steps will follow," he pointed out.
The leaders of both countries have
given instructions to their diplomatic agencies to hold a dialogue on this
issue, he said. "Representatives of our diplomatic agency are
exceptionally competent, as well as their counterparts in the United States. Of
course, each side will be safeguarding its interests but I believe that they
will also be interested that global security should persist," the Russian
security chief said.
Instructions will also be issued to
the security services of both counties to cooperate, Patrushev said. "They
are not cooperating in all the areas but this cooperation is expanding and I
believe will continue expanding."
The issue of strategic stability is
also constantly raised during all the contacts of the staff of Russia’s
Security Council with the US side, he said. "That is why, we will keep
discussing this issue," the head of Russia’s Security Council said.
"Besides, I believe it is very
important that this issue should be discussed in contacts between the defense
agencies of both countries. I believe that these agencies are exceptionally
competent and can yield a large positive effect from the viewpoint of strategic
stability," Patrushev stressed.
INF Treaty issue
The Intermediate-Range Nuclear
Forces (INF) Treaty, signed by the Soviet Union and the United States on
December 8, 1987, took effect on June 1, 1988. It applied to deployed and
non-deployed ground-based missiles of intermediate range (1,000-5,000
kilometers) and shorter range (500-1,000 kilometers). Washington repeatedly
accused Russia of violating the accord, but Moscow vehemently dismissed all
accusations and, in its turn, expressed grievances over Washington’s
non-compliance.
On February 1, 2019, US President
Donald Trump and US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo announced the suspension
of Washington’s obligations under the INF starting on February 2.
On August 2, Washington formally
withdrew from the INF Treaty and the Russian Foreign Ministry, in turn,
officially confirmed that the Treaty had been terminated at the United States’
initiative.
New START
New START, which came into force in
2011, limits Russia and the US to no more than 700 deployed intercontinental
ballistic missiles (ICBM), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM) and
strategic bombers, no more than 1,550 deployed warheads and 800 deployed and
non-deployed launchers.
The Treaty is set to remain in
effect for ten years (until 2021) unless a new document is signed to replace
it. The document can also be extended for no more than five years (that is,
until 2026) by mutual agreement of the parties.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.